First, since this Court issued Order #67-Remand, the parties have discussed steps to move forward expeditiously to the implementation of the corrective statements. The parties plan to update and submit for this Court’s consideration proposed Consent Order language to incorporate the revised text across all executions (newspapers, television, websites, and onserts); and to make other conforming changes to the Consent Order. Among possible changes to the Consent Order, Plaintiffs have proposed that the parties replace the agreed-upon Trigger Date mechanism with a date certain for implementation to begin in newspapers, television, and company websites, and a second date certain for implementation to begin on onserts; and that the parties remove the tobacco companies’ reservation of rights to appeal.

. . .

The parties respectfully request that the Court require them to apply their best efforts, by August 11, 2017, to submit an agreed upon (Proposed) Second Superseding Consent Order, or to provide a further status report to the Court outlining the status of finalizing mockups and any other remaining issues concerning the implementation of the corrective-statements remedy in these media channels. The parties are attaching a (proposed) Order for the Court to consider and, if acceptable, to enter.

06/27/2017 6208 ORDER #67-Remand: In accordance with the Opinion of the Court of Appeals in April 2017, the Parties shall be governed by the Corrective Statements set forth in pages 5-7 of the accompanying Memorandum Opinion; any objections or comments to the Corrective Statements shall be filed no later than 14 days after the issuance of this Order; no submission shall exceed five pages. Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 6/27/17. (CL) (Entered: 06/27/2017)

On consideration thereof, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court appealed from in these causes be affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the case be remanded for further proceedings, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date.

The parties respectfully notify the Court that the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has announced that it is deferring enforcement of all future compliance deadlines under the Deeming Rule for three months . . .

Plaintiff Nicopure Labs, LLC believes that this deferral is not a reason for the Court to withhold its decision on the pending cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs Right To Be Smoke-Free Coalition et al. do not join Nicopure in this last point. Defendants take no position on this point.

NOTICE OF AMICUS CURIAE CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS IN RESPONSE TO THE COURT’S NOTICE TO PARTIES

EXCERPT:

Lawyers with the law firm, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, have been representing Tobacco-Free Kids and other public health and medical organizations in connection with amicus curiae briefs either filed, or to be filed, in various lawsuits challenging FDA’s deeming rule extending the agency’s authority to, among other tobacco products, e-cigarettes and cigars. Although Tobacco-Free Kids does not anticipate having Zuckerman lawyers enter an appearance before this Court, Andrew N. Goldfarb and Carlos T. Angulo at Zuckerman have performed approximately four (4) hours of work on this matter thus far and are expected to provide substantial assistance in drafting the amicus brief that Tobacco-Free Kids intends to file in this case.

I hereby provide notice to the parties that my former law firm, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, has, from time to time, and still may, represent the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (“CTFK”). When I was a lawyer at the firm, I did not work on any matter on behalf of CTFK. Additionally, my wife is a partner at Zuckerman Spaeder LLP. She has never worked on a matter for CTFK.

. . .

I do not know whether Zuckerman Spaeder LLP is assisting CTFK in the amicus brief it intends to file in this matter. In the event that my former firm has provided or will provide any assistance or advice concerning the amicus brief that CTFK intends to file, CTFK shall file a notice with the court